ETHNIC CLEANSING
Yes. Though I reckon sooner or later, there’ll be plenty of white liberals in the camps.
“Immigration matters are civil matters, meaning that immigrants – whether they are naturalized citizens or not – do not have the right to an attorney in such cases.”
How can immigrantion matters be considered a civil matter if you criminalized someone’s immigration status?
Example in Tennessee: "The legislation, criminalizing the act of being in Tennessee without legal immigration status, would come with both jail time and an eviction notice from the state. Judges would be required to issue 72-hour warnings to leave Tennessee to anyone charged or convicted of the crime.
The first offense would be a misdemeanor, but would rise to a felony if someone is charged a second or subsequent time."
That means Tennessees courts should immediately shoot that down as unconstitutional because it is a civil matter according to the federal government.
How can immigrantion matters be considered a civil matter if you criminalized someone’s immigration status?
Because you have a judge who rubber stamps your twisted legal reasoning. And you’ve got a liberal opposition that only knows how to shrug at fascism and deflect blame onto college leftists for not voting harder.
I guess the logic is that this is a civil matter, then the consequences of it are criminal. Still, seems silly.
How could consequences for a civil matter be criminal. Just sounds wonky to me. It would be like saying marriage is a civil matter, but if you get divorced or cheat on them them it’s criminal.
Because being here without citizenship could be criminal, so after the civil trial you have to do whatever needs to be done to stay or leave. It’s not instantly a criminal act, but the consequences could lead to criminal actions if you don’t make the changes required.
Because being here without citizenship could be criminal
Bud, it either is or isn’t. Wtf is this “could be” shit?
What? No. There’s a lot of ways to be in the nation legally without citizenship. That’s what visa are for.
Tennessee’s red as a baboon’s ass. They won’t be striking anything down as unconstitutional.
There isn’t much opposition in Tennessee, but Memphis and Nashville still exist. So you have Tennessee judges that have blocked their bills to ban drag shows, hemp products, ID’s for porn, and laws against transporting women in need of health services. They don’t always win long term but they don’t just let everything go through without a peep. I’m sure there are others I don’t remember, but it is always nice to see when they do block something.
I’ve always felt america had a distinct lack of a morality police /s
Removed by mod
Ok let me just follow along with this.
The trump adim is saying they can revoke citizenship by pointing to anything and claiming “moral character”.
What’s to stop them from say “circumcision of children is poor noral character” and jist revoke the citizenship of anyone
Nothing. That’s kind of the point.
Not a loophole. Ambiguous and subjective criteria are designed to give decision makers cover to ultimately do whatever they want, unbound by the rules. When the system permits, the system is flawed.
Department of Justification.
Smells like what SD in Sweden has been harping on with their ‘dålig vandel’. They’d love to have the kinds of power Teh Dånald has.
Bout the most cringe worthy thing i have ever heard…
A bunch of card carrying Nazis claiming " Morale suparity "
Lost family over this shit. Like how can I look you in the eyes knowing you voted for literal Nazis? How can you put on your cross necklace and pretend you’re a good Christian when you chose hate and malice?
Same way they’ve always done
At least it was mutable last year. This one ain’t looking so hot though.
“[The administration] can’t, on their own, denaturalize people, they still have to go to a federal district court,” said Chisthi.“
Because they give a shit about federal courts
Except SCOTUS has just ruled that defendants have to make a legal claim for each and every act enabled by an unconstitutional law. So yeah Trump can do literally anything he likes.
Moral character? Taco should be the first to have this applied to, then.
That’s a grossly overbroad and self-serving reading. This Supreme Court will be completely fine with it.
So what are we going to call this social score? That totally isn’t a social score.
For all their huff and bluster about hating communism, repuglicans sure seem willing to adopt the worst parts of it.
Is it a loophole for presidents too?
Social credit system in China sure pissed off a lot of Americans.
But watch us get it under a different name.
They’ll just tie it to your credit score and call it the freedom score.
